Gaming — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Views per post sit far above this size band
14,500 average views per post against 1,223 subscribers — an engagement rate of 1188.0%. Across the 8,694 registered channels in the same cohort — 1,000–3,162 subscribers, posting mainly in English — the middle half sit between 5.02% and 27.5%, with a median of 12.7%.
What this was computed from
Window
30 days (13 July 2026 – 12 August 2026)
Posts measured
9 of 9 published in the window (0 exact, 9 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled
130,760
Mature posts only
1325.4% over 8 posts read at least 24h after publication
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 12 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Growth
4 measurements spanning 3 days, net +54. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 1,161–1,231 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Aug 2026, 17:02
1,223
+44
6 Aug 2026, 15:23
1,179
+10
6 Aug 2026, 12:02
1,169
no change
6 Aug 2026, 10:30
1,169
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 25 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
1188.0%
avg views ÷ 1,223 subscribers
Avg views / post
14,500
9 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.624%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
9
of 20 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026
Posts held
20 (25 June 2026 – 6 August 2026)
Views total
130,760
Reactions total
816
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Aug 2026, 12:02 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Reaction mix
1,122 reactions across 20 posts, in 30 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.6% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🤡
422
37.6%
❤
143
12.7%
🤣
131
11.7%
😭
102
9.09%
🔥
44
3.92%
😱
43
3.83%
👎
35
3.12%
❤🔥
31
2.76%
🕊
31
2.76%
😨
19
1.69%
🤔
15
1.34%
😁
14
1.25%
👍
13
1.16%
🤨
13
1.16%
👀
10
0.891%
💩
8
0.713%
💊
7
0.624%
✍
4
0.357%
💔
4
0.357%
🤓
4
0.357%
10 further kinds
29
2.58%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 1,122reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 2026 to 6 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
如果您对未来会实装的角色抱有期待，我可以负责任确保真实的对您说：
潘塔罗涅，皮耶罗，普契涅拉，卡皮塔诺，艾莉丝，若娜瓦，大家最爱编的萍姐姐，以上在7.Ⅹ大版本内都不会实装。
若娜瓦和潘塔罗涅会死在至冬的剧情中。
钟离是冰之女皇弑杀天理计划中的关键。
If you hold expectations for characters being playable in the future, I can responsibly and truthfully assure you:
Pantalone, Pierro, Pulcinella, Capitano, Alice, Ronova, and Madam Ping—the one everyone loves to make up rumors about—will not be playable within the 7.X versions.
Ronova and P…
关于若娜瓦
7.1版本我们就要打若娜瓦，跟她永别了。
若娜瓦攻击了派蒙之后，招致了致命的制裁。
因为若娜瓦要颠覆世界，之后版本七神都来了。
刚见面就要说再见了👋🏻如果你希望她未来还有机会复活，可以在各个平台多表达表达，兴许人气足够未来还有可能呢？反正现在是寄了
About Ronova
In Version 7.1, we'll be fighting Ronova and saying our final goodbyes to her.
After attacking Paimon, Ronova brought a fatal divine judgment upon herself.
Because she sought to overturn the world, all the Seven Archons will be making an appearance in the upcoming versions.
…
戴因斯雷布将会在7.X大版本内进池自机
Dainsleif will be playable in version 7.X
▌「拾枝者」·戴因斯雷布
未来与过去的结点
=====================
「原初逆转了毁灭，天空之岛焚烧了大地之国。白垩追逐着黄金，赤月对黑日复仇。未来拯救过去，年长者与年幼者同血相残。——这是世间回环的命运。戴因，对你来说，那缕金发又是什么呢？必须杀死的人，还是忏悔的对象？」 ——自称通晓命运之人
关于诺伊
亥珀波瑞亚时代的人，与深廊套里的记述者文明有交集
About Noy
A person from the Hyperborean era, He has connections to the Scribe civilization mentioned in the Deep Galleries.
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Shirai_Kurokochan. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 237,213 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 3 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 9 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“白井黒子” (@Shirai_Kurokochan), 1,223 subscribers as measured 9 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Shirai_Kurokochan.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.
